If you don't hold the brake, your brake lights are not on. If you get rear-ended in this situation, due to not having brake lights on, you are at fault. Guaranteed. Ask any attorney.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Firmware 7.0 Beta Discussion
- Thread starter ThreadAbort
- Start date
If you don't hold the brake, your brake lights are not on. If you get rear-ended in this situation, due to not having brake lights on, you are at fault. Guaranteed. Ask any attorney.
HankLloydRight
No Roads
Ugh, just like I said, it's controversial, and the law isn't black and white like you portray with blanket "opinions sounding like facts" statements like that.
I just googled this and read several law firm opinions. If you are the middle car and you rear-end the vehicle in front because you were hit from behind, you are not automatically at fault. One question that will come up - were your brake lights activated? If not, then you may be at fault even though you were the one rear-ended. If that's the case, then guaranteed you are also at fault for rear-ending the car in front even though you were pushed. However, absent of fault on your side, if you are pushed into the car in front due to your being rear-ended, it is the vehicle who caused the chain reaction that is at fault.
- - - Updated - - -
Sorry, no more off topic. I was late to this thread.
Trying to circle this discussion back to firmware updates, I think the case that's being discussed will be an interesting one from an accident-avoidance or at least minimization perspective. At some point in the future, I imagine the vehicle will sense the impending rear-end and if possible will be able to provide some sort of mitigation procedure. Whether this is letting off the brakes, holding the brakes, sensing clear space and accelerating, etc.. I can foresee a time where this is not an unreasonable expectation. Of course, the car behind will eventually also have accident avoidance and will hopefully not come flying in at full speed.
mknox
Well-Known Member
I got a ticket years ago for no brake lights. Old car, and I just had the wiring fixed. Checked all the lights before I set out. Got pulled over by a cop for no brake lights and ticketed while stopped at a red light. I showed him my receipt for the work and he let me cancel the ticket a few days later after the shop re-fixed the wiring and I went in to the station to prove they were now working.
So yes, I think you need to have your brake lights showing when stopped in traffic... at least where I live.
I used to drive a stick, I'd always wait at red lights without holding my brake. In 10 years of doing that, I got pulled over 0 times.
I've never heard of me being at fault if I got rear-ended. That seems absurd to me (not saying it's not true, just absurd).
I've never heard of me being at fault if I got rear-ended. That seems absurd to me (not saying it's not true, just absurd).
jgs
Active Member
I know somebody who was once found at fault for being rear-ended while stopped at a red light, because (this is true) she had violated common practice by... stopping at a red light. I don't think I'll name the country it happened in, but it was not in North America. [*] (It's also possible she was cited for the offense of being a foreigner involved in an accident with a native, but that was not the reason given.)
[*] I will say, however, that the US State Department has a special bulletin emphasizing and re-emphasizing the importance of defensive driving in this country.
Last edited:
R²B
All Star
All these leaks and we still don't know if the system nags you, or how Autosteer is enabled....
mknox
Well-Known Member
Hey, me too. In fact I often sit at red lights with my foot off the brake (Creep Off) in my Model S. I do tend to be aware of people coming up behind me and if I see that happening, I'll step on the brake just so they see brake lights. If there are other cars behind me already, I generally don't. A funny observation: If I'm siting at a light with my foot on the brake, then take my foot off the brake, more often than not the guy behind will do so too, then have to jam them back on when he creeps forward and I don't!
I think my ticket above was just dumb luck because the cop came up behind me, then decided to pull me over for a check.
However, reading through this, I think going forward I'm going to be more inclined to keep my foot on the brake when stopped so that a) people behind see brake lights and b) I'm less likely to get pushed into the car in front if I get tapped from behind (regardless of who's fault it is, the less hassle, the better).
Yeah. I usually let off 10 or more seconds ahead of the light changing in anticipation. Maybe not the best idea. Even worse (for a couple of reasons), if I'm on an uphill incline, I'll sometimes feather the throttle so that the motor keeps me in place. This more robust hill hold feature should stop that behavior. This thread might help, too. :smile:
HankLloydRight
No Roads
Going forward I just might be inclined to use the brakes at a stop only so people behind me can see the Lighted TESLA applique blinking.
mknox
Well-Known Member
The current implementation of Hill Assist does leave the brake lights on until it releases, so I would expect that to continue.
GlmnAlyAirCar
Active Member
What if you are sitting at a light, car in front of you, brakes are depressed. Semi truck is coming at you and you can't get out of the way. But the catch; you have two kids in the rear-facing child seats. Here I'm thinking safest option (for the kids) is to release the brakes in order to minimize the first impact (which is going to extend their heads forward) and hopefully get the brunt of the force against the car in front (where their heads will be depressed into the car seat)?
jgs
Active Member
I was wondering if somebody would bring that up. Yes, there's an exception to everything, and in the specific case you describe rolling forward might well be better than staying planted. (In real life, if a semi plows into you in that situation, god help you because no matter what your brakes are doing it isn't going to end well.)
I haven't been able to read the entire 120 pages of posts so my apologies if some of this is a FAQ. But my thoughts:
1) I wonder how they were able to "significantly" improve the climate control performance with only a software upgrade?
2) I'm glad they are making the reverse-to-forward transition smooth, it actually kind of bothers me more than I should admit today.
3) I'm excited to try the new and improved Autopilot, especially in stop-and-go traffic. I'm hoping it can handle that a bit more gently than it does today too.
4) I don't love the new UI nor do I hate it as much as some of you do until I get my hands on it and find out how much (hopefully) I can configure it.
5) I'm excited the lane-intrusion alert and I'm hoping AutoPilot will be able to take advantage of that to either accelerate or slow down if somebody comes into your lane while on AutoPilot. Do we know if this is true?
6) Finally, I hope to be pleasantly surprised on the auto-parallel-park feature. I don't think I'd use it regularly but it would be nice when getting into a really tight space, assuming it can handle that. Just two nights ago I had to park against a very low curb with no street lights at night. I came about 1/4" from road rash on my rear rim and didn't even realize it until I got out of the car. I'd doubtful the car could have parked in those conditions but if so that would have been great.
1) I wonder how they were able to "significantly" improve the climate control performance with only a software upgrade?
2) I'm glad they are making the reverse-to-forward transition smooth, it actually kind of bothers me more than I should admit today.
3) I'm excited to try the new and improved Autopilot, especially in stop-and-go traffic. I'm hoping it can handle that a bit more gently than it does today too.
4) I don't love the new UI nor do I hate it as much as some of you do until I get my hands on it and find out how much (hopefully) I can configure it.
5) I'm excited the lane-intrusion alert and I'm hoping AutoPilot will be able to take advantage of that to either accelerate or slow down if somebody comes into your lane while on AutoPilot. Do we know if this is true?
6) Finally, I hope to be pleasantly surprised on the auto-parallel-park feature. I don't think I'd use it regularly but it would be nice when getting into a really tight space, assuming it can handle that. Just two nights ago I had to park against a very low curb with no street lights at night. I came about 1/4" from road rash on my rear rim and didn't even realize it until I got out of the car. I'd doubtful the car could have parked in those conditions but if so that would have been great.
As an owner of a "classic"pre-autopilot RWD P85, I am very pleased with what I've seen so far of 7.0 and can't wait to get it in my car.
Loving the improved clarity of the UI. Tesla is leading the industry in this regard. Software-driven interfaces need to be as clear as possible, and as quick-to-read as possible. Getting rid of shadows, rims, edges and 3D button effects is part of this. Tesla already started down this road when they revised the dashboard speedometer disc about a year ago.
I have no trouble with loosing the 3D feel if that makes it more clear and modern. ..
Loosing essential information for a display designed for an autopilot car IS troublesome
roblab
Active Member
To me, this is obvious: You stop too close to the car in front. There is NO reason to get closer than 20 feet, leaving you the option to get out of the way, or pull up to allow more room behind you.
My niece was parked behind a bunch of cars at a stop sign. The semi driver had zoned out, and never hit the brakes. A half dozen cars were crunched. She saw him coming, but was "too close" to steer out of the way. Who's fault is that?
People follow too close. Then they get into these scenarios.
Leave more room.
Similar threads
